Sadly, No!

Shorter Tom Kovach:

O-bonics, and other lessons

• Ha ha! Here are some ways to make fun of Obama’s name. But not everything is fun and games: Evidence shows that the non-citizen Muslim-Hindu sleeper agent Obama [gibber gibber] has spectral horns growing out of his head [woop woop], and may be the False Prophet who heralds the Antichrist, i.e., the spectrally-horned [ee-yii, ee-yii] Bill Clinton.

‘Shorter’ concept created by Daniel Davies and perfected by Elton Beard. We are aware of all Internet traditions.™

Note: In one of the column’s many highlights, Kovach provides direct photographic evidence of Obama and Clinton sporting baleful and supernatural sign-of-the-devil marks, à la The Omen. We can find no rational explanation for these spine-chilling images, which are unique in the. . .oh wait.

Mickey Mouse Chair Professor of Law
at George Mason, David E. Bernstein

---

Not all nutball conservative law professors are at the University of Tennessee School of Law. George Mason University Law School, a lower-tier law school in the DC area, has its fair share, including David E. Bernstein, who draws one of the more preposterous conclusions from the Supreme Court’s recent decision in the gun control case:

The Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, upholding the Second Amendment right of individuals to own firearms, should finally lay to rest the widespread myth that the defining difference between liberal and conservative justices is that the former support “individual rights” and “civil liberties,” while the latter routinely defer to government assertions of authority.

It seems to me that one instance doth not a “myth” retire. Professor Bernstein, obviously worried about the same thing, puts on his Mickey Mouse thinking cap, strains his brain muscle as hard as he has ever done before, and plops out some other examples of how Justice Scalia is such a great advocate of your civil liberties that he deserves to be given the Nobel Peace Prize. Twice.

For starters:

In Davis v. Federal Election Commission, decided the same day as Heller, Justice Samuel Alito, writing for the Court’s conservatives, reaffirmed the “fundamental nature of the right to spend personal funds for campaign speech.” The dissenters argued that “in the context of elections . . . limiting the quantity of speech” is perfectly acceptable.

This is the sort of self-parody that makes our job — as juvenile parodists and purveyors of adolescent humor — so easy here at Sadly, No! In Davis, the court struck down the, get this, “Millionaire’s Amendment” to McCain-Feingold, thereby striking a blow for the rights of rich guys running for office. Woohoo! Give me more of those civil liberties. This is rather like calling the decision striking down the punitive damages imposed on Exxon for the Valdez oil spill a victory for the civil rights of large corporations to desecrate our coastlines.

And what the Supreme Court specifically did in Davis was strike down the right of people running against millionaires to receive individual campaign contributions in excess of the normal individual limits. The conservative justices were thereby, you see, safeguarding the rights of the poor candidates to have less money than their millionaire opponents, while the liberals were attacking the rights of millionaires to buy a seat in Congress. Bad liberals!

Ready for some more fun, SadlyNots? Here’s another example of Republican justices protecting your civil rights:

Liberals have also been more willing than conservatives to limit the First Amendment’s protection of “expressive association.” The Court’s conservatives held that forcing the Boy Scouts of America to employ a gay scoutmaster violated the Scouts’ right to promote its belief in traditional sexual morality.

In other words, the conservative justices are busy protecting the right to discriminate. But the right to equal access by gay scouts and scoutmasters to programs using public funds and public facilities? Not so much. And before the liberals messed up everything with Lawrence v. Texas, which struck down the Texas sodomy law, the conservatives were busy protecting the right of evangelical Christians who didn’t want to live next door to people having something other than Jesus-approved man-on-top-of-woman sex.

And the fun just doesn’t stop with this clown:

Liberal justices have been willing to uphold virtually any use of race by the government–including quotas in higher education, set-asides for government contracts, and raced-based assignments of students to public schools–so long as the government claims benign motives. The conservatives, by contrast, argue that the government must treat people as individuals, not as members of a racial caste.

More rights for whites! Less for blacks!! More for me; less for you! Now those are the sorts of civil rights a white guy like me (and Bernstein) can sign on to.

The conservatives, for example, have been … more inclined to forbid government regulation of “hate speech.”

So, to sum up, if you’re a rich straight white guy who wants to run for office and demonstrate at funerals holding up “God Hates Fags” signs, this Supreme Court is looking out for your rights. Who would have thought it?

Above: God attempts to seize Kevin McCullough’s Fonzie jacket.

---

Hi, everybody! Did you miss me? I know musclehead revolutionary Kevin McCullough did, because he got me a present.

I was hoping with a headline like “WHY OBAMA’S ‘CONDOMS’ DON’T WORK,” it would be about how Barry X is a rapacious, fecund Negro sex predator who was actually behind the tragic knocking-up of all those poor girls in Gloucester, MA. Sadly, that’s not the direction Kev took, but I’m not gonna say he disappoints:

When Barack Obama took his message of condoms to Rick Warren’s pulpit at Saddleback Church he knew at the time that he was about to advance deceit to the gullible congregation and get away with it.

Questions to the Obama campaign about the great condom deception were referred to mustachioed spokestwirler Snidely Whiplash.

As this correspondent warned before it happened, Obama would be the victor (because of the concept of “implied endorsement”) and Warren’s congregation, the American people, and those who faced the threat of HIV/AIDS would be the ones to suffer. How I wish I had been wrong!

Obama was the victor, of course, because he wants people to get AIDS and die. And you can tell that McCullough is sincere in his wish that he had been wrong, because in the very next paragraph, he brags about how Rush Limbaugh gave him props for always being right about Obama.

Yet Obama is wrong on the Gospel of Condoms. For all the “Praise Jesus” and “Yes Lords” he may utter, his understanding of sexual advocacy, mental processing, emotional awareness, and most importantly adaptive behavior, run 100% in total contrary dispute to Biblical truth.

And, man, the last person you want in the White House is a guy whose understanding of mental processing and adaptive behavior is more than, say, 30-35% in contrary dispute to Biblical truth. Oddly, I did a search for “emotional awareness” and “sexual advocacy” over at Bible Gateway and nothing came up — but that’s what we have guys like Grant Swank and Doug Giles for, to find that stuff.

For the last seven years Congressman Waxman has annually held up funding for abstinence – claiming it didn’t work. Of course logical people everywhere are still scratching their heads at that one, because it is 100% scientifically provable that abstinence – when practiced is always 100% reliable.

Abstinence is also 0% reliable when not practiced, but pointing that out is probably against one of the commandments or another. So better not to mention condoms at all: Why tell people about a method of disease prevention that’s 90% effective when used, when they’ve already got one that’s better? It’s the same reason I don’t think we should tell drunk drivers that they can get a cab. We should just tell them not to drink, and whatever happens after that, we have done our duty.

This has been true since we first began seeing AIDS cases develop. Elected officials should have called for quarantine for the public good, forced those who were diagnosed early on to notify past partners, and a whole bunch of other common sense steps. Normal steps that had been our previous policy as it related to communicable diseases were all ignored.

Actually, given America’s shameful history of dealing with sexually transmitted diseases like syphilis and gonnorrhea, it’s quite in keeping with ‘normal steps.’ And, given its very specific mode of transmission and relatively low fatality rate, a quarantine would no doubt be seen as punitive. Finally, we do not require victims of other sexually transmitted diseases — especially ones suffered primarily by heterosexuals — to notify past partners, so it’s a bit hard to understand why we should “force” AIDS sufferers to do so. But all of this is secondary to Kev’s main point, which is that sex is bad:

Obama could have stood in Rick Warren’s pulpit and proclaimed that sex is a function that God designed for those in lifelong marriage. In doing so he certainly would have been biblical in his position – but it would have ticked off every gay activist that as of this week has now pledged money, grassroots support, and votes.

He might also have pissed off unmarried straight people, divorced people, or anyone who doesn’t like to think of sex as a “function” designed by God to create children, much like eating is a function designed by God to create turds. But who needs those people’s votes? Clearly Obama needs to be courting evangelicals, who have been such a big part of the Democratic base in recent years!

The sad thing is that in the CDC’s analysis they casually mention that the age group of “man” that is most at risk presently in the HIV surge are black boys 13-24 years of age.

A sad statistic, to be sure. Let’s see if Kevin can, through a percussive explosion of #1 super-ignorance, turn it into something even worse! I bet he can.

13 years of age? Why are HIV infected adult males raping 13 year old boys? Why are they getting away with it?

Gosh, Kevin, I don’t know! Could it be:

1. Because “13-24 years of age” implies a demographic range beyond merely 13-year-old boys?
2. Because there are ways to get AIDS other than sex?
3. One of which is on the increase among young black males?
4. Because even if they were contracting AIDS through sex, it wouldn’t necessarily imply being raped by savage infected adults?
5. For example, AIDS can be transmitted through consensual heterosexual sex, an activity traditionally enjoyed by young males of all races?

Oh, sure, all of those things seem reasonable enough, but they’re not going to let Kevin write awesome sentences like this one:

Without authentic discussion about the choices we make in life, without quality advice about the moral, physical, emotional and mental health consequences we will suffer as a result of our choices, children are literally being raped to death.

To recap: If Barack Obama is elected president, roving gangs of gay Negroes will rape your children to death. Only 127 days until Election Day!

First, the LA Times:

Obama is shifting toward the center

Barack Obama, as he introduces himself to the broader voting public, is emphasizing centrist — even conservative — positions on hot-button issues.

In recent weeks, he toughened his stance on Iran and backed an expansion of the government’s wiretapping powers. On Wednesday, he said states should be allowed to execute child rapists. When the Supreme Court the next day struck down the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns, he did not complain.

These views would fit many Republican candidates, but they are the recent profile adopted by a man who has been called the most liberal Democrat in the Senate.

In the primary season, candidates’ chief goal is usually to win their party’s most ideologically driven voters; afterward the candidates often adjust their policy stances. John McCain, the presumptive GOP nominee, has also changed tack on an array of issues. But Obama has drawn attention for the number of issues on which he has taken a moderate stance in recent days.

Now on some level this should seem normal. Candidates have traditionally moved toward the center after winning their primaries to attract more undecided voters. Except that that isn’t happening with John McCain, who has if anything gotten crazier in recent months. As Matt Taibi notes:

But the idea that John McCain is kicking off his trek to the White House by fleeing at top-end speed from the faltering Republican brand is the kind of absurdly facile misperception that only the American campaign press could swallow whole. The reality is that the once independent-thinking McCain has by now completely remade himself into a prototypical, dumbed-down Republican Party stooge — one who plans to rely on the same GOP strategy that has been winning elections ever since Pat Buchanan and Dick Nixon cooked up a plan for cleaving the South back in 1968. Rather than serving up the “straight talk” he promises, McCain is enthusiastically jumping aboard with every low-rent, fearmongering, cock-sucking presidential aspirant who’s ever traveled the Lee Atwater/William Safire highway. […]

McCain enters the general election in the form of a man who has jettisoned the last traces of his dangerous unorthodoxy just in time to be plausible in the role of the torchbearing leader of the anti-Obama mob, waving the flag and chanting, “One of us! One of us!” all the way through to November. He now favors making the Bush tax cuts permanent, he’s unblinkingly pro-life every time he remembers to mention abortion, and he’s given up bitching about torture. With his newfound opposition to his own attempts to reform immigration policy and campaign finance, McCain is perhaps the first candidate in history to stump against two bills bearing his own name.

McCain’s transformation is so complete that at a recent town-hall meeting in Nashville, when asked to name an author who inspired him, the candidate — who once described televangelists of the Jerry Falwell genus as “agents of intolerance” — put none other than Joel Osteen at the top of his list. “He’s inspirational,” McCain said.

How does this happen? How has wingnuttery so poisoned our elections that both candidates are striving to show the rest of the country just how stupid and crazy they are? Don’t we need, to coin a phrase, a choice not an echo?

ABOVE: The American Thinker
Logo (improved version*)

---

Meet Helen Cadogan, this week’s New Wingnut of the Week, who comes to us by way of The American Thinker, that cesspool of pseudo-intellectual racism which gives free rein to lengthy dissertations on the alleged inferiority of the darker-skinned races. As is our normal practice, we’ll first provide a little biographical background on our latest NWOTW and then move on to her award-winning contribution.

Ms. Cadogan currently is a freelance copy-editor from Newport News, Virginia. Free-lance copy editor means, of course, that Helen is unemployed and has plenty of time to sit in her trailer and muse about the various indignities that have been done to her, no doubt all perpetrated by liberals, Negroes, and apparently her former students. She had a brief stint as an English instructor at Thomas Nelson Community College, where her typical rating at RateMyProfessors.com ranged from “unorganized” to “worst instructor I’ve ever had.” Former students called her “very unhelpful,” “rude and inconsiderate,” “horrible,” and “unclear.” She was also accused by several students — why am I not surprised? — of constantly interjecting religion into her English class, one student saying:

She interjects too much religion/biblical analogies in the literary discussions–and does not accept differing opinions when they differ with hers.

So naturally a former instructor at a junior college who was, apparently, universally despised by her students is the perfect person to explain the failings of the American educational system. Naturally, the problem isn’t the schools or the teachers — the problem is … are you ready? (cue drumroll) … all the black students, who are all shiftless and stupid and incapable of learning how to read even if they were given 20 years of 24/7 instruction by Mr. Chips himself.

I was talking to a friend the other day who teaches at an elementary school and has a student whom I shall name Shakir.

Now, Helen couldn’t pull a name like, say, Mike or Josh or Chris from her foundation garments, because then, of course, it wouldn’t be clear that the student was black. We should be thankful, I suppose, that at least she didn’t decide to call the student Barack.

Shakir is ten, and he’s barely literate. My friend’s class is not a large one; she has five to eight students. She also has a teaching assistant, and between them, the kids receive a lot of personal, one-to-one attention. Nevertheless, Shakir still can’t read. The why of this phenomenon is quite important; you see, there are lots of Shakirs in the black community.

So, what do we know about all these Shakirs?

All across America, schools are confronted with Shakirs who either do not show up for school or who attend school but hang out in the hallways, bathrooms, and other hideaways. Even in well disciplined schools, there are Shakirs who go to class and put their heads on the desk. They refuse to work; the same way, their parents refuse to attend parent-teacher meetings. They sleep, they disrupt, curse, fight, and do no work

By now, it’s plain that “Shakirs” is just being used by Helen as a synonym for “n**g*rs.” Reread the passage above, substituting the n-word for “Shakirs,” and you get the true flavor of what Helen means here.

What can the schools do, confronted with thousands of Shakirs all across America?

Helen doesn’t really say, other than to imply, that they should all be expelled, but some of her more lunatic commenters have ideas. Here’s what the exquisitely literate “Louise” would do with all those illliterate little Shakirs:

Social survices need to take that child away when he is very young, and bring back oprhanages, etc. must be better than this ghetto life.
after mom has more kids and cannot take care of them. puther in jail.

Commenter “Randy Ottenwess” adds his own solution:

And to top it all off, Shakir and his ilk are allowed to vote.

So, we can solve the Shakir problem, apparently, by expelling all the Shakirs from school, throwing their mothers in jail, and repealing the Fifteenth Amendment. Any other ideas?

*Cf. the original improvement of the logo, which served as the inspiration for this version, and which, in turn, was suggested in part by commenter g.

For a while now, the Editors has been promoting the crazy claims of Crazy Bob Dornan, who seems to think that the Vietcong implanted radio receivers in John McCain’s teeth during his captivity to send him subliminal pro-commie messages and turn him into a 21st-Century Manchurian Candidate. I don’t normally give these sorts of claims much credence, but now I think we may have found the proof that will blow this story wide open (emphasis mine):

‘Hanoi Hilton’ jailer says he’d vote for McCain

John McCain has an unusual endorsement — from the Vietnamese jailer who says he held him captive for about five years as a POW and now considers him a friend.

“If I were an American voter, I would vote for Mr. John McCain,” Tran Trong Duyet said Friday, sitting in his living room in the northern city of Haiphong, surrounded by black-and-white photos of a much younger version of himself and former Vietnam War prisoners. […]

Duyet said one of the reasons he likes McCain for president is the candidate’s willingness to forgive and look to the future. […]

Duyet, 75, grew testy during the interview when repeatedly questioned about torture and why so many other former POWs say they too were mistreated. He preferred to talk about McCain as an old buddy.

His photo collection doesn’t include one of him with POW McCain, and he said they have not met on any of McCain’s postwar visits to Vietnam. But Duyet said he often met the young Navy pilot when off duty, that McCain would correct his English, and that he had a great sense of humor. And although they never saw eye-to-eye on the war that killed some 58,000 Americans and up to 3 million Vietnamese, he said they listened to each others’ views.

Now obviously this doesn’t prove per se that John McCain is a VC plant who will give away all our defense secrets to the Red Chinese upon taking office. It does, however, raise some questions. Why was McCain so friendly with this particular jailer? What views did the jailer express that McCain “listened” to while in captivity? Why does one of America’s sworn enemies think we should vote for McCain for president? What “future” do McCain and the jailer look forward to together? A future of freedom and prosperity? Or a future where hard-working American boys will be forced to toil in Charlie’s slave labor camps while the VC has its way with our women folk? So, so many questions; I wonder if mainstream reporters will start asking them, just like they did when this guy was running for president.

Crazy Bob? What do you think?

Above: ‘Fischer cut bait,’ or some such pun

---

We’ve noticed there’s been something on ol’ Bryan Fischer’s mind lately. That is, other than the fact that homosexuals are Nazis, and vice versa, and that liberals are Nazis, and so forth. No, it’s not that the exact same thing as Darwin’s Theory of Evolution preceded Darwin by 2500 years, and was rejected by all great minds including the Founding Fathers (who espoused Intelligent Design). Rather, it would seem by reading Fischer’s recent columns that criminals are being coddled by the judicial system.

Supreme Court trashes Constitution and victims of child rape
Bryan Fischer
June 25, 2008

Time for “Jessica’s Law” in Idaho
Bryan Fischer
June 23, 2008

Sad day for justice: Idaho Supreme Court orders resentencing for cold-blooded killer
Bryan Fischer
June 19, 2008

So there you have it; due process interferes with the punishing of criminals. I wonder why ol’ Bryan has been fixating on that lately.

Uh-oh, what’s this in yesterday’s paper?

Swindell, Fischer ordered to pay city legal fees in Ten Commandments case
Idaho Press-Tribune Staff

BOISE – City of Boise officials say two local activists have until July 15 to pay $10,131 in legal fees over a court case concerning the removal of the Ten Commandments Monument from Julia Davis Park in 2004.

In a letter sent to anti-abortion activists Brandi Swindell and Bryan Fischer, the City of Boise states it has put a lien on the property and assets of Swindell and Fischer.

Swindell and Fischer each received a certified letter from assistant city attorney Scott Muir on June 23 informing them that if they do not respond by July 15, the city will proceed to collect the amount plus interest and costs. Currently there is $563.74 accrued interest on the account.

“This is to inform you that we have filed the above referenced judgment with the Ada County Recorders Office which places an automatic lien against all real and personal property under your individual names. This judgment will remain on your credit record until the debt is paid in full,” the letter stated.

Swindell, co-founder of the Keep the Commandments Coalition and director of Generation Life, issued a media statement: “The recent actions by Mayor (Dave) Bieter and the Boise City Council to go after a former pastor and a single woman, who both run non-profit organizations, is deeply disturbing on many levels. Forcing peaceful citizens to pay legal fees, 4 1/2 years after the court case, is vindictive and clearly a tactic designed to punish citizens who freely embrace their constitutional right to engage in the political process.

Swindell and Fischer’s explanation is that, basically, up is sometimes down, cats may be dogs, by losing the Ten Commandments initiative they actually won it on points, by not asking for legal fees they shouldn’t have to pay any either, and by God in heaven, this malicious and disgraceful act is a desperate act of revenge from a desperate and malicious government disgracefully gone desperately mad (i.e. for revenge).

But then Fischer’s Renew America buddy Adam Graham, attempting a letter of support, spills the beans that Fischer knew about the judgment all along, but decided not to pay, hoping the city would forget about the whole thing.

While this sort of thing can easily spiral out of hand, fortunately all around, Idaho forbids the execution of the mentally incompetent.

I think that we all have a God-given duty to spread awareness of this website to as many disaffected Republicans as humanly possible.

We know that George Bush was God’s Candidate in 2000. We know that George Bush was God’s candidate again in 2004. And George Bush has been God’s president for the last 8 years.

Trust in God and vote your faith. Keep America safe. Write-in George W. Bush for President in 2008.

Gavin adds: Wow, it’s like the satirical opposite of the Clinton bitter-enders. When Clinton went on national TV and specifically asked them to vote for Obama and not for McCain, it only made them dig their heels in harder.

It’s almost as though there’s something fishy going on.

[Hanx! Lawnguylander]

(Via.)

Incidentally, sorry for light posting on my part lately. I’ve been working on Something Big that’s taken me a while to write, but should hopefully be published on Monday! Will keep y’all posted!

We know that the 2008 UEFA European Football Championship isn’t the biggest story in America — that honor goes to the scandal that, because he never served in the armed forces, we don’t know the “core principles for which, in some sense, [Barack Obama ] is willing to die” — but we’ll link to this bit from the German TV show Frontal21 and translate the punchline for our non-German speaking readers:

The last time we began an international competition with a win against Poland, it was the Russians who celebrated at the end.

An old favorite from the same folks:

The German captions read: